We used a tape measurer to calculate the stream width from the top of the left bank to the top of the right bank. In order to find out both the landscape of the river bed and of the bank, we measured the length from the top of the bank to the bottom of the bank and top of the water in 21 intervals (3 ft each) across the stream. Then we measured the length from the top of the water level to the stream bed in 13 intervals (3 ft each). By putting these measurements together we were able to come up with an accurate visual landscape of the stream banks and stream bed.
Physical Measurements
The study location for Marsh Creek Site 6 has a bank to bank width of 38 feet with a reach of 456 ft. The steam flow decreased each week over the course of the 3 week monitoring period due to a continuing drought in the state of Georgia. On the week of June 14 (after .92 inches of rain) the stream flow was measured at 670.22 cfs. The following week on June 21, the stream flow was 679.79 cfs. The last week of monitoring, June 28, the stream flow was unable to be calculated because the water velocity could not be calculated (i.e. it was less than 1 cfs).
Chart MC5. This chart shows the discharge or water flow seen at Marsh Creek Site 6. On June 28, discharge was unable to be calculated because the water velocity could not be calculated (i.e. it was less than 1 cfs). It should be noted that Georgia was in a significant drought during this period in time.
In-Stream Characteristics
Within the calculated reach of this portion of Marsh Creek the study area has one low-angle turn, 0 pools, 0 riffles, and 1 run. The stream bed mostly consisted of sand and silt with few if any rocks; any rocks present were completely embedded. There was only occasional natural debris, such as small leaves, and almost no trash/litter. It should also be noted that both banks of this particular section of Marsh Creek are located in an environmental corridor. There was a slight rotten egg odor to the water during the week of June 28 and we believe this may be from the sewage pipe that runs across the stream. The water was very turbid througout the monitoring period and sediment settled in the water samples collected; we were never able to see the bottom of the stream.
The left bank of the creek (looking upstream) was heavily vegetated with trees and some dense shrubbery. The right bank (looking upstream) had the same characteristics as the left bank. Both banks were heavily undercut, contained 80% vegetated banks, exposed soil, and exposed roots. The slope on both banks was fairly steep, making it hard to enter and exit the stream site. Because of the steep slopes, both banks contained a fair number of trees that had severely exposed roots. About 100 yards upstream of the location at which we collected the water samples there was a fallen tree in the stream. Main Page | Overview | Map | Stream | Water | Bacterial | Urban Ecology | Conclusion | Site
MARSH CREEK SITE 6
STREAM CHARACTERISTICS
Method
We used a tape measurer to calculate the stream width from the top of the left bank to the top of the right bank. In order to find out both the landscape of the river bed and of the bank, we measured the length from the top of the bank to the bottom of the bank and top of the water in 21 intervals (3 ft each) across the stream. Then we measured the length from the top of the water level to the stream bed in 13 intervals (3 ft each). By putting these measurements together we were able to come up with an accurate visual landscape of the stream banks and stream bed.Physical Measurements
The study location for Marsh Creek Site 6 has a bank to bank width of 38 feet with a reach of 456 ft. The steam flow decreased each week over the course of the 3 week monitoring period due to a continuing drought in the state of Georgia. On the week of June 14 (after .92 inches of rain) the stream flow was measured at 670.22 cfs. The following week on June 21, the stream flow was 679.79 cfs. The last week of monitoring, June 28, the stream flow was unable to be calculated because the water velocity could not be calculated (i.e. it was less than 1 cfs).Chart MC5. This chart shows the discharge or water flow seen at Marsh Creek Site 6. On June 28, discharge was unable to be calculated because the water velocity could not be calculated (i.e. it was less than 1 cfs). It should be noted that Georgia was in a significant drought during this period in time.
In-Stream Characteristics
Within the calculated reach of this portion of Marsh Creek the study area has one low-angle turn, 0 pools, 0 riffles, and 1 run. The stream bed mostly consisted of sand and silt with few if any rocks; any rocks present were completely embedded. There was only occasional natural debris, such as small leaves, and almost no trash/litter. It should also be noted that both banks of this particular section of Marsh Creek are located in an environmental corridor. There was a slight rotten egg odor to the water during the week of June 28 and we believe this may be from the sewage pipe that runs across the stream. The water was very turbid througout the monitoring period and sediment settled in the water samples collected; we were never able to see the bottom of the stream.The left bank of the creek (looking upstream) was heavily vegetated with trees and some dense shrubbery. The right bank (looking upstream) had the same characteristics as the left bank. Both banks were heavily undercut, contained 80% vegetated banks, exposed soil, and exposed roots. The slope on both banks was fairly steep, making it hard to enter and exit the stream site. Because of the steep slopes, both banks contained a fair number of trees that had severely exposed roots. About 100 yards upstream of the location at which we collected the water samples there was a fallen tree in the stream.
Main Page | Overview | Map | Stream | Water | Bacterial | Urban Ecology | Conclusion | Site